National Republican., 1887-05-09
AssAULTINe A MINISTER.
Who Brings the Railroad Before the
Interstate Commission.

Mr. VIM. II. Council, who is O minister
Of the African Methodist Episcopal Church
and principal OF the state normal and in
dustrial school at Huntsville, Ala, a school
maintained by the state Of Alabama, the
Slater fund, and the Peabody fund in part,
has brought an action before the interstate
railway commission against the Western
Atlantic Railroad Company for forcibly re-
moving him from car Of that company in
violation OF the interstate railway law and
claiming damages. Mr.. Council alleges IN
his petition that he purchased his ticket on
the 7th day Of April, 1887, at Chattanooga,
Tenn, Of the regular agent OF the company
Just previous to the starting Of the train
for Atlanta, Ga, and entering the car took
bis seat without objection from any per-
son. That shortly afterward he was ap-
preached by man, presumably an en-
ploye Of the company, and told that he
must remove to another car. He declined
to do so because he did not recognize the
right or authority Of the party directing
the removal, he not stating that he was
conductor. Soon after the same or another
employe Of the company came to him aud
again directed him to vacate his seat, upon
which Mr.. Council replied that II the con.
ductor directed him to do so, demanded
his ticket, he would go into another car
"You will have no trouble with he" were
his words. He then states that three men
came to him, one OF whom forcibly struck
him twice with lantern, aud that they
violently elected him from the car forcing
him into another and that he was painfully
wounded and damaged by their actions;
that he appealed for protection to the con
ductor from the employees who had removed
him, and that in response to his appeal the
conductor said, "That's what you get,
d-n you, for not moving when told you.n
Mr.. Council, in answer to this, said, "l did
not know that you had asked me to move
/ have not seen you BEFORE" upon which
the conductor replied, "You are a ID
liar" Mr.. Council states that In conse
quence Of his injuries he was compelled to
abandon his journey at Dalton, Ca, thus
losing the value Of his ticket from that
place to Atlanta; that as soon rs he recoy'
cred lie purchased another ticket for
Atlanta and pursued his Journey to that
place.
Mr.. Council left the train at Dalton, ac-
cording to bis statement, and the following
dispatch was sent from that place and
printed in the Birmingham Ne,Ds.
1t Is undisputed that Mr.. Council paid for
a first class ticket from Chattanooga to
Dalton, and the second section of the inter
state commerce law says that II any CON
mon carrier subject to the provisions Of
this act shall charge, demand, collect, or
receive from any person or persons
greater or less compensation for any
service rendered, or to be rendered, In the
transportation OF passengers or property,
subject to the provisions of this act, than 1t
charges, demands, collects, or receives from
any other person or persons for doing for
him or them like and contemporaueou
service In the transportation Of like kind
of traffic under substantially similar circum-
stances and conditions, such common
carrier shall be deemed guilty of unjust
discrimination, which is hereby prohibited
and declared TO be unlawful.
And section Sd says: That It shall be un-
lawful for any common carrier subject to
the provisions of this act to make or give
any undue or unreasonable preference or
advantage to any particular person, COM
pany, firm, corporation, or locality,
or any particular description of
traffic, in any respect whatsoever, or to
subject any particular person, company,
firm, corporation, or locality, or any par
ticular description Of traffic, to any undue
or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage
in any respect whatsoever.
Mr.. Council claims that under this pro-
vision of the law he Was entitled to the
seat which he took In the car, and that the
railway company made itself liable to all the
penalties prescribed by the interstate COM
merce law. He intends to prosecute the
case to the bitter end, and is determined
to see whether or not railway company
can remove a respectable, well-behaved
man of his race from car when he has
paid full fare and is entitled to full accom-
modations. His attorneys claim that the
decision Of the Supreme Court In regard to
the civil service act does not apply and
cannot apply to the Interstate commerce
law, as this law comes under the plain pro-
visions Of that section Of the constitution
emitting Congress to regulate commerce,
which includes transportation both for per-
son and property within the state.